Motion style acupuncture treatment (MSAT) for acute low back pain with severe disability: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Acupuncture is widely-used to treat patients with low back pain, despite insufficient evidence of the technique's efficacy for acute back pain. Motion style acupuncture treatment (MSAT) is a non-traditional acupuncture treatment requiring a patient to exercise while receiving acupuncture. In Korea, MSAT is used to reduce musculoskeletal pain and improve functional status. The study aims to evaluate the effect of MSAT on acute low back pain with severe disability.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>This study is a multicenter, randomized, active-controlled trial with two parallel arms. Participants with acute low back pain and severe functional disability, defined as an Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) value > 60%, will be randomly allocated to the acupuncture group and the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) injection group. The acupuncture group will receive MSAT and the NSAID injection group will receive an intramuscular injection of diclofenac. All procedures will be limited to one session and the symptoms before and after treatment will be measured by assessors blinded to treatment allocation. The primary outcome will be measured at 30 minutes after treatment using the numerical rating scale (NRS) of low back pain while the patient is moving. Secondary outcomes will be measured at 30 minutes after treatment using the NRS of leg pain, ODI, patient global impression of change, range of motion (ROM) of the lumbar spine, and degrees of straight leg raising (SLR). Post-treatment follow-up will be performed to measure primary and secondary outcomes with the exception of ROM and SLR at 2, 4, and 24 weeks after treatment.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The results of this trial will be discussed.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrial.gov <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01315561">NCT01315561</a></p

Massage Therapy for Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Randomized Dose-Finding Trial

In a previous trial of massage for osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee, we demonstrated feasibility, safety and possible efficacy, with benefits that persisted at least 8 weeks beyond treatment termination.We performed a RCT to identify the optimal dose of massage within an 8-week treatment regimen and to further examine durability of response. Participants were 125 adults with OA of the knee, randomized to one of four 8-week regimens of a standardized Swedish massage regimen (30 or 60 min weekly or biweekly) or to a Usual Care control. Outcomes included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), visual analog pain scale, range of motion, and time to walk 50 feet, assessed at baseline, 8-, 16-, and 24-weeks.WOMAC Global scores improved significantly (24.0 points, 95% CI ranged from 15.3-32.7) in the 60-minute massage groups compared to Usual Care (6.3 points, 95% CI 0.1-12.8) at the primary endpoint of 8-weeks. WOMAC subscales of pain and functionality, as well as the visual analog pain scale also demonstrated significant improvements in the 60-minute doses compared to usual care. No significant differences were seen in range of motion at 8-weeks, and no significant effects were seen in any outcome measure at 24-weeks compared to usual care. A dose-response curve based on WOMAC Global scores shows increasing effect with greater total time of massage, but with a plateau at the 60-minute/week dose.Given the superior convenience of a once-weekly protocol, cost savings, and consistency with a typical real-world massage protocol, the 60-minute once weekly dose was determined to be optimal, establishing a standard for future trials.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00970008

Gastroduodenal toxicity of low-dose acetylsalicylic acid : a comparison with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Background: Low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (ASA; aspirin; 75–325 mg/day) is effective for the prevention of cardiovascular events, and its use in this indication is rapidly increasing. However, the use of ASA and, indeed, other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is limited by the incidence of adverse gastroduodenal events. Objectives and scope: To review the clinical evidence for, and the pharmacodynamic basis of, ASA-induced gastroduodenal toxicity in comparison with NSAIDs, and address the question of whether low-dose ASA is ‘safe’ from a gastroduodenal perspective. This was a narrative, descriptive review, rather than a formal systematic review. Findings: Adverse gastroduodenal effects, which are well known to occur with NSAIDs, are also prevalent in patients receiving low-dose ASA for cardiovascular protection even at doses as low as 75 mg/day. The risk of gastroduodenal toxicity is particularly high among ‘at-risk’ low-dose ASA patients (aged470 years, previous ulcer or upper gastrointestinal bleeding and users of antiplatelets or NSAIDs). There are important differences in the mechanism of ASA-induced gastroduodenal toxicity, relative to NSAIDs. These differences include the effects on the cyclooxygenase (COX)-1 isoenzyme, local effects on the gastroduodenal mucosa specific to ASA and a reduction in platelet aggregation. Conclusion: Data suggest that ASA causes significant gastroduodenal damage even at the low doses used for cardiovascular protection. These effects (both systemic and possibly local) may be pharmacodynamically distinct from the gastroduodenal toxicity seen with NSAIDs. Studies are required to establish strategies for improving the tolerability of low-dose ASA, allowing patients to continue to benefit from the cardiovascular protection associated with such therapy

Quality of life in chronic NSAID users : a comparison of the effect of omeprazole and misoprostol

Objective : To compare the impact on quality of life (QoL) of omeprazole and misoprostol during healing, and omeprazole, misoprostol, and placebo during maintenance treatment in chronic NSAID users with NSAID-associated gastroduodenal lesions. Methods : Validated baseline and follow-up QoL questionnaires were completed by 610 patients (healing: after 4/8 weeks; maintenance: after 6 months). Results : Patients with arthritis being treated with NSAIDs have a poor QoL. Rheumatoid arthritis causes more joint problems and physical mobility limitations than osteoarthritis. Chronic NSAID use causes heartburn and dyspepsia. QoL improved on both treatments (about equally on two general QOL scales), but omeprazole relieved gastrointestinal symptoms more than misoprostol, particularly reflux, abdominal pain and indigestion symptoms. During maintenance, both treatments maintained QoL, but misoprostol induced diarrhoea. Conclusion : QoL in arthritis patients on chronic NSAID treatment is destroyed. Omeprazole is superior to misoprostol for relief and prevention of NSAID-associated gastrointestinal symptoms allowing continued NSAID treatment without compromising the patients' QoL